This weeks lecture basically put up a fence between what we've been labelling as good news (commercial broadcasting) and bad news (public broadcasting). Not the type of good and bad news like Grandma's hip is broken, but it will be cheap. I'm referring to legitimate news about society. However, is public broadcasting really bad news?
According to the WGBH Educational Foundation Conference, Public Media mainly consists of bloggers, non-profit internet sites and podcasting. Basically - everything digitally free. Commercial Media lives off money and needs to provide the utmost important and factual news to retain the income from the public wallet.
With the economy twirling down the toilet in their respective motions according to one's global position, and the internet fast overtaking the world in many forms of media and other everyday uses, Public Media could become the way of the future...
So, what does this mean for Commercial Media? Is this the end of "facts we heard in the news"?
I for one believe it is essential to have both of these medias. If there were only Commercial Media, nothing could be taken lightly and for the younger generation, boredom would soon set in. However, if there were only Public Media, there would be no facts about what is happening in the world; only that Titanic 3D is in cinemas at a limited time only...
No comments:
Post a Comment